Obama Vows To Veto Law That Requires Him To Follow The Law He Pressured Congress To Pass

byChris BoundsonMarch 14, 2014

Obama wholeheartedly supported the Obamacare bill and used every ounce of pressure possible to ensure it passed: procedural maneuvering (reconciliation), pork (bribes), lies (if you like your plan/doctor…) and all-out demagoguery. He really, really wanted Obamacare to pass! So why is Obama is promising to veto a law that would require him to follow the Obamacare law that he wanted to pass?

The Obama administration has made at least 35 executive changes to Obamacare – all without Congressional approval. In addition, thousands of waivers to various Obamacare mandates have been issued since the law was passed. Why all the changes and waivers? Well, it is because businesses, special interest groups, and a whole lot of Americans still do not like Obamacare. They didn’t like it before it passed and with a better understanding of how it will negatively affect them they absolutely do not like it now. Skyrocketing insurance premiums, excessive costs to businesses and organizations, losing current insurance policies and doctors – it’s a perfect “I told you so” situation for Republicans.

The reason for the changes is not necessarily because Obamacare is so unpopular though. Obamacare has never been popular. The reason is strictly political. It’s because Obama and Democrats are becoming increasingly unpopular. Obama is not about to go back to Congress for legislative fixes. That is too risky. Many of the positive fixes such as repealing the individual mandate and medical device taxes are not even debatable for Democrats. However, Obama is not worried about Congress – because he has a pen and he is going to use it. That brings us to this:

The House of Representatives passed the “Enforce the Law Act” Wednesday, a bill designed to push back against the numerous unilateral moves the Obama administration has used to circumvent the law.

Five Democrats joined Republicans in passing the bill by a 233 to 181 vote.

H.R. 4138, sponsored by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R., S.C.), would authorize the House or Senate to sue the executive branch for not enforcing laws and provide an expedited process through federal district courts. The bill is one of several the House GOP is pushing to combat the “imperial presidency.”

Republicans say the legislation is necessary in light of the numerous administrative actions taken by President Barack Obama to change and selectively enforce laws, including immigration, marriage, welfare rules, and his signature legislative achievement, Obamacare…

“Throughout the Obama presidency we have seen a pattern: President Obama circumvents Congress when he doesn’t get his way,” Goodlatte said.

This bill may be a good attempt to rein in an abuse of executive power, but it’s already dead in the water. Harry Reid is not going to bring it up in the Senate. Some jokingly wonder why Obama doesn’t support the bill and ignore it like he does other laws.

Although this bill will go nowhere, at least one Democrat was happy to have the constitutional discussion. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee rejoiced the opportunity to talk about the Constitution and how it has served this nation well for “some 400 years.”

Hey,Congress is violating the separation of powers by attempting to make Obama stop violating the separation of powers. The official can summarily re-compose key procurements of an earth shattering social insurance law that was composed and passed by the assembly (while offering no lawful support for doing so), however in the event that the lawmaking body tries to get judges included to keep him down, well, that is an established extension too far. Basically, he's contending that on the grounds that Article II abandons it to the president to reliably execute the law, just O gets to choose whether he's "loyally executing the law" by specifically disregarding parcels of it that profit him politically. Keep in mind, this is the fellow who ran in 2008 guaranteeing to move back Bush's official overextend on the grounds that he was a law professor and knew the Constitution 'n stuff.Thank you so much!!Rebecca Lammersen…